Next time you screw up at your job, remember this and that anyone can screw something up.
Yes, it is a bonehead mistake, but mistakes/errors happen.
The next time you screw up and someone asks if you are lazy, stupid or retarded, think about this post.
scotth wrote:
I'm here to spread heartening news but first, there's a lot of truth in what Keith has to say: some race directors care about course accuracy, most don't.
Now for the heartening news: probably 75% of all courses are short, maybe more. I know this because in the process of certifying hundreds of courses, maybe a handful were long enough in the initial layout. And, among those that are accurate...every weekend there's a race in the USA, a good course goes bad w/varying reasons all around. Whether a course is correct or not, big races & small, bad things happen. All the time. And this isn't going to end next year or in 25 years. There...that ought to offer some peace of mind.
I have stories...
85.4% of all statistics are made up.
agapius mackwamba wrote:
FYI - having been a race director in the past, I know this is a difficult and thankless job. It has multiple moving parts, not the least of which is the reliance upon well meaning volunteers - IF you can get enough volunteers. But the SINGLE best way to ensure an accurate race distance is a course certification - AND YOURSELF OR SOMEONE YOU TRUST WITH A COURSE MAP IN THE LEAD VEHICLE. No other method works anywhere near as well.
Yup, and at the places you'd never expect. Several years back I was directing a 5K race and 1 mile fun run. Now of course no one expects a problem with the fun run. But being the anal sort I'd put a good marker where the turnaround was and stationed a pair of very nice elderly volunteers at that point to turn the kids around the cone. They brought some chairs with to wait while we got the fun run ready to start. Gun goes off and we're standing at the finish waiting for the kids. MANY minutes go by and not a soul shows up. After 10 minutes we're getting a tad concerned and a couple moms are freaking out. Then our walkie talkies crackle and one of our policemen on the 5K course says there's a whole herd of kids down there (about a mile away) and what should he do with them? Before he could do anything the kids all took off up a hill which thankfully was in the direction of the finish line. They apparently were having a great time. After about 25 minutes from the gun they show up at the finish in a big herd to finish their "mile". Moms were NOT happy, kids most definitely were, and it was an evening race with beer so I don't think the dads even noticed.
Turns out my volunteer couple thought it was so charming watching all the kids run they neglected to get up and stand by the cone and turn them around. They didn't expect them to be that quick and kids being kids they stampeded by and improvised.
The next year I rode my bike to the fun run turnaround as well as led the 5K.
Scott, you really think that small a percentage of courses are certified? In that case, we (measurers) are doing a terrible job.
I know it varies greatly from state to state. I'd say OK, TX, IL, CA maybe NY are good, whereas some states only have 1 or 2 certifications a year. If you want to see how a state is doing, go on the USATF search engine and leave the distance blank and type in that state in the space provided.
A lot of RD's don't want to spend the money (and it's usually only a couple $100, good for 110 yrs) to get their courses certified, b/c they figure the runners won't care, and "I can do it myself w/ my car/wheel/GPS." In reality, though, an accurate distance is probably the most important thing to runners, aside from the Penguins, who would rather have a fast time no matter how they get it.
As for RD's who have a course screwup during the race: the best thing they can do, that will defuse most runner resentment, is to measure the distance that WAS run and announce it. It might not have been a 5K, but at least if you know you ran 2.94 miles you can figure out your effort.
CrappyRunner wrote:
Well two NCAA races I have done, have been long. At least 800 meters for each. I ran 2005 NCAA DII south regional, which was a 10k, which had to have turned out to be more like 10.8k. I ran 2006 DII prenats, which also turned out to be about 10.8k. The kenyans were walking around saying "This is bullshit, no way I ran a 6 min last mile!"
Who gives a flying f*** what time you run in a cross country race unless it's a course you're running over and over?
JimG wrote:
Scott, you really think that small a percentage of courses are certified? In that case, we (measurers) are doing a terrible job.
I know it varies greatly from state to state.
As for RD's who have a course screwup during the race: the best thing they can do, that will defuse most runner resentment, is to measure the distance that WAS run and announce it. It might not have been a 5K, but at least if you know you ran 2.94 miles you can figure out your effort.
Jim, I haven't done any counting but my gut instinct tells me only about 10% of all courses are certified. Look thru a list of a state's races for the next month & I'll bet you'll find only 1, maybe 2 in 10 are certified. As you note, there are various reasons for this and various ways RD's get their courses measured. I submit most RD's are put off by the modest expense to get the course certified.
When you look at the # of courses certified each year, remember that many are re-certs of previously measured courses.
Is USATF doing a terrible job w/it's cert program. I've been doing this for over 25 years & I've never received a mandate from USATF to 'actively encourage/educate/spread the word' about course certification. Plus, as you know, 99% of us in USATF measuring are volunteers which has some bearing on how much energy a regional certifier will bring to the program.
I like your idea very much to measure a course after-the-short-course-fact & let runners know the distance actually run. This is rarely done.
Finally, Jim meant certified courses are good for 10 years, not 110 years. By 2117, entry fees will be $150 for a 5 km and many roads will have gone the way of Route 66; bypassed, rerouted, reworked, etc.
Jim-
Re: your last paragraph above about remeasuring after the race and posting the difference in case of a screw-up, that's exactly what I did in January. We produce one of those "First Run" races. It's a certified course, has been run for about 20 years but we had a small course change in 2006. I painted arrows on the ground beforehand and set up the cones race morning, but a neighbor moved the cones before the race started. It was pure coincidence that the corner where the cones were moved was the one corner my volunteers didn't show up for (January 1 can be like that). The lead police cruiser got confused when she arrived at the cones because she was sure it was supposed to be the next block but turned a block early anyway (also, the street sign had been stolen...Murphy's Law)-and of course the runners followed even though a few of the leaders knew the course was supposed to go 1 more block. Winner ran in the 15's and by 18 minutes into the race I knew we had a problem. After talking to some locals I figured out what had happened. Went out that afternoon with the wheel and measured the difference. I figure for a couple hundred yards the wheel is going to get me close enough. We posted a note on our website on top of the results and I also did a "conversion chart" so that if you ran this time it would actually have been this time for a full 5k. Getting on top of it earned us some good feedback on the post-race surveys.
So the guys posting in here about measuring courses, how exactly do you guys do it? You use a bicycle, or wheel, or how is it measured? Because obviously the line you take on the course has an effect on the outcome of the distance, right?
Is GPS not as accurate as what you guys do? How about Google Map/Earth? I usually find those both to be very accurate, what do you guys do differently that makes it "Certifiably" accurate? Thanks
Your last questions first- no, GPS & Google whatever are NOT as accurate as a calibrated bike w/a mounted Jones counter. GPS et al are plenty accurate, to a point, but not good enough for USATF standards for record quality courses.
In a nutshell: to certify a course you need a minimum 1000' calibration course, a bike w/a Jones counter and the nerve & confidence to ride the SPR, shortest possible route on a course. There's a bit of math involved in converting #'s generated from the calibration course for use in measuring a course...but all include a SCPF, short course prevention factor of .1% of the race distance. The SCPF is added to ensure the course is long enough.
To my satisfaction, people wearing GPS thingies have never found a course I certified to be short- always long. Many, of course, nag the RD w/their findings, insisting the course WAS long. Ah...but if only they were willing to spend 10 times more (or more) for more expensive GPS units, I might be willing to take another look at the course I measured.
scotth wrote:
To my satisfaction, people wearing GPS thingies have never found a course I certified to be short- always long. Many, of course, nag the RD w/their findings, insisting the course WAS long. Ah...but if only they were willing to spend 10 times more (or more) for more expensive GPS units, I might be willing to take another look at the course I measured.
Good post. I just bought a Garmin Forerunner, and I'm looking forward to wearing it in some road races. I understand that they have a bit of inaccuracy though. I have a general question about that, when my GPS says that it's "20 ft" for GPS Accuracy, what does that mean exactly? That every mile is + or - 20 feet, or that the entire run is off plus or minus 20 feet? I've never really understood that.
I see some of you guys saw the little gaff that some volunteers (who I did not recruit, btw) did at my 5K. The answer - volunteers suck. Next year I will personally inspect each and every volunteer to make sure they are up for the job at hand. My condolences for the short course. Also, next year, the prize money structure will be reconfigured so that it pays out by merit. In other words, the guys' total prize money will be 10 times what the womens' will be.
Actually, I am kidding, I did not direct this race.
BUT, I am surprised again Scott at how Jim shows himself to be a much more worthy measurer than you. Your take seems to be one of doing the bare minimum. OF COURSE the measurer's organization should do what they can to promote accurate distances. It is the attitude like the one you consistency have displayed that contribute towards USATF certification being the joke that it is.
scotth wrote:
Jim, I haven't done any counting but my gut instinct tells me only about 10% of all courses are certified. Look thru a list of a state's races for the next month & I'll bet you'll find only 1, maybe 2 in 10 are certified.
I seriously doubt 10% are certified. I think that number is on the far HIGH side.
I would bet the vast vast majority of road races are measured with a car odometer.
Honest Question wrote:
Is GPS not as accurate as what you guys do? How about Google Map/Earth? I usually find those both to be very accurate, what do you guys do differently that makes it "Certifiably" accurate? Thanks
It depends on what your definition of very accurate is.
It is believed the calibrated bicycle method (CBM) is accurate to within about 0.1%. If you want to know why that is believed, it can be explained, but I doubt most people want to suffer through that.
Google Earth is accurate to within about 0.5% if you are very careful, if you can accurately identify the start/finish/turnaround locations on the map, and if the route is not obscured too badly by trees, buildings, etc.
I've measured several courses of known length by GPS. Those measurements fell into three categories, A) pretty accurate, B) not so accurate, C) way off. On my next measurement, when I don't know the correct distance ahead of time, I will have no way of knowing if the measurement falls into category A, B, or C.
If you calibrate your measuring wheel before and after each course measurement the same way as in the CBM, and you measure the course twice like in the CBM, using a measuring wheel is as accurate as CBM. But almost nobody that uses a measuring wheel does that.
NewRD wrote:
BUT, I am surprised again Scott at how Jim shows himself to be a much more worthy measurer than you. Your take seems to be one of doing the bare minimum. OF COURSE the measurer's organization should do what they can to promote accurate distances. It is the attitude like the one you consistency have displayed that contribute towards USATF certification being the joke that it is.
Silly boy.
FIagpoIe WiIIv wrote:
I cannot see going long on a measurement but race directors will very often make their 10K and under courses a little short, especially if they are aided by a slight descent.
Reason being is that they want runners to go away happy, get the word out, and return next year.
How do you do this? - By setting up your race in a fashion that allows many runners to set a PR.
Ha ha. That reminds me of a time a jogger co-worker ran a 5k that was .75 miles short. He kept telling everyone how he set a pr and how he ran the last mile in under 5 minutes with a "mind blowing kick of death."
That slug hasn't run a sub 7 mile in his life. When it was proven that the short was 3/4 of a mile short, he wouldn't listen. He continues to cite that race as his 5k pr.
I ran a "PR" in a 5K race back in the early 90's and realized right away that it was short. I am anal about such things, because I always show up to race the clock. The clock means nothing when the course measurement is wrong. So, I took things into my own hands by researching the issue of measurement and by buying a jones counter to measure local courses. Dukerdog, is correct, when carried out correctly, with multiple measurements AND multiple calibrations, a course can be laid out extremely accurately. I am still amazed by the fact that I can measure a course start to finish and then finish to start and then do it all over again, calibrations included, a week later and come up with markings that are all within inches of each other. If you want accurate courses, buy a jones counter for yourself or for your local club and learn how to use it. By the way, I measure in the wee hours of Sunday mornings to avoid traffic and cut nice tangents.
jones counter wrote:
By the way, I measure in the wee hours of Sunday mornings to avoid traffic and cut nice tangents.
Speaking of wee hours, I have a question for Scott. At one point I was going to need to calibrate around 10 at night, measure, mark, etc, for a couple hours then do the post calibration at 2-3 in the morning. Technically, you haven't done all the rides "on the same day".
I asked the question of the state certifier at the time, but since I ended up doing the measurement early Thanksgiving morning instead it became a non-issue and I never got an answer. Have you ever run into this?
luv2run wrote:
Next time you screw up at your job, remember this and that anyone can screw something up.
Yes, it is a bonehead mistake, but mistakes/errors happen.
The next time you screw up and someone asks if you are lazy, stupid or retarded, think about this post.
You are absolutely correct. I appreciate RD's and the work they do so that I can race. There are dedicated RD's that can make an error, and I will forgive each time.....
....and then there are RD's that have know idea what they are doing, are not runners and don't really give a crap about the course length. I did a small 5k a while back and came through in an unbelievable time. After being initially happy, I also realized the time was probably too good to be true. Bottom line is the course was short and the organizers seemed to care more about everyone having a good time and what kind of snacks were distributed. I only do certified ever since.
luv2run wrote:
Next time you screw up at your job, remember this and that anyone can screw something up.
Yes, it is a bonehead mistake, but mistakes/errors happen.
The next time you screw up and someone asks if you are lazy, stupid or retarded, think about this post.
This isn't the first time this RD screwed up the mileage for a race in the area. Do you know about the background of the organization that ran the race? Don't try to make it sound like everyone is picking on some kid for mis marking the course.
Tell me, if someone at your job makes the same error 3, 4 or 5 times, do they still have a job? Or maybe you do that, which is why you were so sensitive to the remark.
Keith Stone wrote:
[quote]jones counter wrote:
Speaking of wee hours, I have a question for Scott. At one point I was going to need to calibrate around 10 at night, measure, mark, etc, for a couple hours then do the post calibration at 2-3 in the morning. Technically, you haven't done all the rides "on the same day".
I asked the question of the state certifier at the time, but since I ended up doing the measurement early Thanksgiving morning instead it became a non-issue and I never got an answer. Have you ever run into this?
I have. Just last week I started a measurement at 9 p.m. and finished at 11:50, so I just "beat" the requirement.
However, I've been told that technically it's a 24-hr period, although you can bend the rules on that by calibrating late evening, measuring at night, then recalibrating the next morning.
The intent of the rule is to make sure you do your pre- and post-calibrations as close to the measurement ride as possible, and under similar conditions. But we all know that's not always possible.
Keith, seems like this question could be addressed better on the Course Measurement msg. board. Have you been there? Lots of good stuff for measurment geeks